Here is another reply that just went up at Answering Islam, this one in response to an attack against the resurrection of the Lord Jesus by Sami Zaatari.
-----------------
Anyone familiar with Zaatari's method of reasoning knows that his arguments against Christianity are often false just on their face (and for that reason have a face only someone like Zaatari could love), and thus any analysis expended on them is bound to be a case of overkill. What is generally true turns out to be no less the case when it comes to one of Zaatari’s latest reckless attacks on Christ and Christianity, which centers on Isaiah 53, a passage he believes refutes the Lord’s resurrection, a doctrine that is admittedly central and indispensable to the Christian faith. (Zaatari’s article can be found here.)
--------------
After reading the rest of this article, which can be found here, please return and leave your comments.
17 comments:
I guess a number of Christian apologists have correctly black listed Sami Zataari, particularly after his last debate with Keith Truth. My own observation after reading his posts and having watched some of his youtube presentations tells me that he is a angry young boy who has yet to mature.
Hey Hogan,
I think you are right about Sami's anger, but then I don't believe Islam aids the maturation process very much, so Sami's failure in this regard is hardly surprising.
I recall the Sami vs. Keith debacle. I read about it on Keith's blog as well as on the AM blog some time ago. The debate took place on Paltalk, did it not? That is likely why I don't know much of anything about Sami being blacklisted; I have never been on Paltalk.
I just know that several Christian debaters have chosen to ignore him.
Some Muslims have even tried to arrange a debate between him and me; however since the arranged debate with Keith Truth, in which they muted Keith and allowed Sami to speak, even with the consent of Sami, I decided not to get involved with Sami in near future; at least there has to be a formal apology and a lot of personal change.
Then of course there are his death threats toward an atheist or agnostic, which he kind of repented off. However, after such an experience I would rather focus on sorting myself out before I continued my attempt to sort out the Christians and the atheists and all the others.
Hello Semper,
Know whats interesting? Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 NEVER talks about a Messiah. Rather Isaiah 53 is about the nation of Israel. This chapter is speaking about the nation of Israel, see Isaiah 49:3.
Also as for debunking the resurrection you may want to read this:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/resurrection/
Also Hogan, Muslims have black listed David Wood for the same reasons. They believe he is angry hate monger. I was talking to Richard Carrier a while a ago, and he even agreed with me. Also Remember David Wood's childish attacks on Nadir Ahmed-- that's just low.
Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com
Ehteshaam said:Know whats interesting? Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 NEVER talks about a Messiah. Rather Isaiah 53 is about the nation of Israel. This chapter is speaking about the nation of Israel, see Isaiah 49:3.
Want to know something even more interesting than that, Ehteshaam? Some people unthinkingly parrot old, easily debunked positions that were first concocted by unbelieving post-Christian Jews and later seized upon and popularized by anti-theistic rationalists.
To see just how easily this idea is refuted, take the verse you gave the reference for but did not quote. Clearly, in the very passage you cited as proof, a distinction is drawn between an individual who is referred to as Israel, and the nation which is alternately referred to as Jacob as well as Israel. Here it is in context:
1 Listen to me, you islands; hear this, you distant nations: Before I was born the LORD called me; from my birth he has made mention of my name. 2 He made my mouth like a sharpened sword, in the shadow of his hand he hid me; he made me into a polished arrow and concealed me in his quiver. 3 He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor." 4 But I said, "I have labored to no purpose; I have spent my strength in vain and for nothing. Yet what is due me is in the LORD's hand, and my reward is with my God." 5 And now the LORD says— he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him and gather Israel to himself, for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD and my God has been my strength- 6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." 7 This is what the LORD says— the Redeemer and Holy One of Israel— to him who was despised and abhorred by the nation, to the servant of rulers: "Kings will see you and rise up, princes will see and bow down, because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you."
If you would like to understand why "the Servant" that brings Israel/Jacob back to the Lord is called Israel, and why all of this is a reference to Jesus, carefully read part two of my article on Deuteronomy 18: Do Not Be Afraid of Him
As for the Carrier article you referred to, no doubt because Islam doesn't provide you with the tools for dealing with the matter yourself, leaving you no choice but to depend on the "strong" arm of atheism, I find such rationalistic attacks on the resurrection to be as easy to refute as those on Messianic prophecy.
Ehteshaam said: Also Hogan, Muslims have black listed David Wood for the same reasons.
If this is true, I'm sure David isn't (and shouldn't be) losing any sleep over it.
They believe he is angry hate monger.
Why, because he pointed out that Islam's official sources actually teach people to be angry hate mongers?
I was talking to Richard Carrier a while a ago, and he even agreed with me.
You are talking to the wrong guy here, Ehteshaam. I am as little concerned about Mr. Carrier's assessment of David as I am about Muhammad's opinion of the Lord Jesus. His opinion is gold to you...not to me.
Also Remember David Wood's childish attacks on Nadir Ahmed-- that's just low.
You seem to be taken in here by Nadir's lofty thoughts of himself. The fact is, if you want to hit Nadir, then you have to aim low. Nothing personal; dem's just da facts, man.
Ehteshaam said:Know whats interesting? Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 NEVER talks about a Messiah. Rather Isaiah 53 is about the nation of Israel. This chapter is speaking about the nation of Israel, see Isaiah 49:3.
You can see my article about it here:
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/JewishMessiahandJesus.html
You misrepresnted me--- I said Isaiah 53 is NOT TALKING ABOUT A MESSIAH. No Jew believes this. Rather its talking about the state of Israel-- NOT any Messiah.
According to Jewish theology the Jewish Messiah was suppose to be a warrior king who would over take the Romans. According to Christianity Jesus was crushed by the Romans. Then his disciples got all sad, went to the O.T. and started to preach the spirtual resurrection ( see 1 Peter 3:18) which later writers misunderstood as a physical resurrection.
Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com
Israel in the singular is called God's servant throughout Isaiah, both explicitly (Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3) and implicitly (Isa. 42:19-20; 43:10) - Other references to Israel as God's servant include Jer. 30:10 (note that in Jer. 30:17, the servant Israel is regarded by the nations as an outcast, forsaken by God , as in Isa. 53:4); Jer. 46:27-28; Ps. 136:22; Lk. 1:54.
Isaiah 53 at the time of its composition had no Messianic connotations whatsoever .
You misrepresnted me--- I said Isaiah 53 is NOT TALKING ABOUT A MESSIAH. No Jew believes this. Rather its talking about the state of Israel-- NOT any Messiah.
Ehteshaam, please try to keep up. I know you said Isaiah 53 is NOT talking about a Messiah; I also know that you, along with a number of contemporary, unbelieving Jews, believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about the state of Israel. My response did not imply that you held otherwise.
I simply pointed out that your postulated proof actually refutes you, for Isaiah 49 actually distinguishes between an individual and the nation, both of whom are called "Israel" and God's "Servant". It is simply a matter of paying attention as you read. Here is the passage again. This time, note that "the Servant," "his Servant," or "My Servant" is distinguished from "the tribes of Jacob" and "those of Israel," i.e. the nation. Indeed, not only is "the Servant" distinguished at times from Israel, he is even said to gather Israel together and bring her back to God; moreover, he is also to be set forth as light and salvation to the Gentiles and is destined to bring the salvation of God to the ends of the earth.
1 Listen to me, you islands; hear this, you distant nations: Before I was born the LORD called me; from my birth he has made mention of my name. 2 He made my mouth like a sharpened sword, in the shadow of his hand he hid me; he made me into a polished arrow and concealed me in his quiver. 3 He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor." 4 But I said, "I have labored to no purpose; I have spent my strength in vain and for nothing. Yet what is due me is in the LORD's hand, and my reward is with my God." 5 And now the LORD says— he who formed me in the womb to be his servant TO BRING JACOB BACK to him and gather ISRAEL to himself, for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD and my God has been my strength- 6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore THE TRIBES OF JACOB and BRING BACK THOSE OF ISRAEL I have kept. I will also make you a light for THE GENTILES, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." 7 This is what the LORD says— the Redeemer and Holy One of Israel— to him who was despised and abhorred by the nation, to the servant of rulers: "Kings will see you and rise up, princes will see and bow down, because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you."
The same thing can be observed in some of the other passages you referenced.
As for whether the Messianic interpretation of Isaiah 53 can be found among older Jewish sources, you simply don't know what you are talking about and so probably shouldn't...talk, that is.
Targum Johnathan: "Behold, My Servant the Messiah shall prosper..." (Isaiah 52:13)
I will happily give you many more quotes if you would like; for now, I am off to bed. You should get some rest too; perhaps it will help you to think more clearly if you do.
Tanach often describes tribes and countries as if they were one person, usually the founder.Isaiah 53, then, continues the theme of prior chapters: Israel is the servant of God. It will suffer at the hands of other nations, but through that suffering will be able to bring the Torah -- and its salvation (though not in the Christian sense of the word) -- to everyone. Whether you agree with this interpretation or not, it is completely consistent with the text. However, the idea that Jesus is this suffering servant is not consistent with the text.
Jesus doesn't fit several of the details in the chapter. a) As mentioned above, Jesus was never sick. Some say that he was sick during the crucifixion, but physical trauma (e.g. execution) is not considered sickness in the normal sense of the word. b) Jesus had no children. Some say this refers to disciples or spiritual children, but the word "zera" is common in the Tanach and, when applied to people, always means linear descendants, not someone's disciples or followers. c) Jesus was not buried with the wicked. One cannot even say he died with the wicked since the Hebrew "rashaeem" is plural and, according to the crucifixion story, one of the thieves next to him ended up in heaven and so was not wicked. d) Jesus did not have long life. Missionaries say he had long life in heaven, but that, again, is stretching the meaning of the word. e) verse 9 "Nor was there deceit in his mouth." doesn't apply because, according to the gospel accounts, Jesus lied to his family about going to Jerusalem. (John 7:8-10), and lied in saying that he never taught in secret (see John 18:20, vs. Matt. 16:20, Mark 8:30 and others).
Ehteshaam said: Tanach often describes tribes and countries as if they were one person, usually the founder.
By the same token, the Tanakh often describes the Messiah, the root and offspring of David, the true vine, etc., by names and titles belonging to great individuals in Israel's history - e.g., David, Prince of Peace (ala Solomon), etc. - as well as names and titles belonging to the nation itself - e.g. Israel, My Servant, etc. - as can be seen in Isaiah's Servant Songs.
Isaiah 53, then, continues the theme of prior chapters: Israel is the servant of God.
Isaiah 52:13-53-12 does continue a theme of prior chapters, just not in the way you asserted on the basis of Isaiah 49. As I have shown and you have now let pass without a word, Isaiah's four great Servant Songs, as they have been identified by scholars, which are thematically related, chapter 49 being one of them, is not/cannot be about the nation of Israel, for the Servant is distinguished from Israel.
Here are the four passages that scholars - Jewish, Christian, and others - all agree are thematically related: Isaiah 42:1-9; 49:1-13; 50:4-11; 52:13-53:12. Gesenius, for example, argued that one and the same explanation must be given for "Israel/Servant" in all four of these sections of Isaiah. Other commentators are in general agreement, no matter their particular explanation (or lack thereof).
When it comes to determining whether the passages are talking about an individual or a group of people, not only are the overwhelming number of interpreters agreed that it refers to an individual (with some saying it refers to Isaiah himself, others to Cyrus, and still others to the Messiah), but the overwhelming number of these hold that it refers to the Messiah. (By the way, some who hold that it refers to a group do not say it refers to Israel, but to the body of prophets, so for example Gesenius).
To reinforce my previous point, let me point you to something in each of these four passages that distinguishes "the Servant" from the nation of Israel (and even from the Gentile nations).
Isaiah 42:6 "I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles,..."
Per this passage in Isaiah's first Servant Song, the Servant is said to be a covenant for Israel and a light for the Gentiles. Accordingly, the Servant cannot be (the nation of) Israel or the Gentile nations, and, thus, must be an individual.
Isaiah 49:5-6 "And now the LORD says— he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him and gather Israel to himself, for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD and my God has been my strength- he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."
Per these passages in Isaiah's second Servant Song, the Servant is said to bring Jacob/Israel back to God and to extend God's salvation to the Gentiles. Accordingly, the Servant is neither (the nation of) Israel or the Gentile nations, and, thus, must be an individual.
To be continue...
Isaiah 50:4-9: According to this passage, it is precisely because Israel is said to be unfaithful and to stand in need of being ransomed that the Servant is sent. In contrast to Israel, this Servant is not rebellious and is the means by which God ransoms the nation. In spite of this, the nation is said to mock and beat the Servant.
Since these passages distinguish "the Servant" from the nation, and since, if I may now remind you of your quote, "Isaiah 53...continues the theme of prior chapters...", then the Servant of Isaiah 53 is an individual and not the nation of Israel.
Q.E.D.
So much for your original claim. As for your new argument against a Messianic interpretation, namely, that it is inconsistent with certain statements found in Isaiah 53, I will get to it later (Lord willing). Just so you know, these arguments have long been refuted, but I am happy to catch you up to speed.
Don't bother skipping off to another argument until you have interacted with what I have already said, which is a response the point you originally brought up. Otherwise I will take your silence on the above as an admission that you have no response. Either concede the point or refute it; that way we can make some progress.
By the way, I understand quite well why you go on to another point without first answering what I have said: it is because all you are doing is plagiarizing other sources.
Comparing what you said in your last post to the following, it is obvious that your new argument is simply a cut and paste job, i.e. plagiarism.
http://home.att.net/~fiddlerzvi/Isaiah53.html
Please either do your own thinking or cite your sources next time. Dishonesty isn't well received here. I'm not a Muslim; be honest, or don't bother commenting.
Semper Paratus,
How many times do I have to say it? ISAIAH 53 NEVER TALKS ABOUT A MESSIAH! PSALM 22 NEVER TALKS ABOUT A MESSIAH! Get over it, your fighting a losing battle. No Jewish Rabbi in their right mind believes this silliness. Yes I did a copy and paste job like you Christian apologists have never done so-- in fact your buddy Sam Shamoun does it all the time from athiest authors. But I should have quoted so.
As one website says:
Jesus' own disciples didn't view Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy.
Source: http://www.jewishpassion.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5:isaiah-53&catid=9:texts&Itemid=9
So your saying something different than Jesus entourage?
But it gets worse. As Bart Ehrman explains in his newest Book, Jesus Interputed-- THE JEWISH MESSIAH WAS SUPPOSE TO BE A WARRIOR KING, A POLITICAL LEADER OF THE JEWS, NOT CRUSHED TO DEATH BY THE ROMANS LIKE YOUR JESUS WAS. In fact Jews are still waiting for their messiah to come. You can read my thoughts about this subject here:
http://answering-christian-claims.com/JewishMessiahandJesus.html
So much for Isaiah 53 being a "Messianic Prophecy". Welcome to reality.
Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com
Also the servant is the Nation of Israel-- it is clear that Isaiah 53 is about the Jewish People. It certain that it is NOT about your friendly neighborhood savior, J.C.
How many times do I have to say it? ISAIAH 53 NEVER TALKS ABOUT A MESSIAH! PSALM 22 NEVER TALKS ABOUT A MESSIAH!
It doesn't matter how many times you say it; saying so, does not make it so.
Get over it, your [sic] fighting a losing battle.
If I am fighting a losing battle, it is not a battle that is being lost to you. You have once again ignored what I wrote, a good indication that you have nothing to stand on.
No Jewish Rabbi in their right mind believes this silliness.
Jesus, the Rabbi, taught it, as did Rabbi Saul, and I prefer their version of sanity to yours.
Yes I did a copy and paste job like you Christian apologists have never done so-- in fact your buddy Sam Shamoun does it all the time from athiest authors. But I should have quoted so.
Oh, lookie! A guy who just got caught using someone else's material as if it were his own is now accusing others of the same thing.
Do you really expect me to believe the testimony of a plagiarist against Sam without any evidence?
It is evident to me that you are just going to keep ignoring my arguments and repeat your blather about the Servant being the nation of Israel. Therefore, I will send you away with your assertions and tell you not to come back until you find a refutation to go along with them.
Also, next time you come, leave your plagiarism (i.e. Taquiyya) at the door, and keep your unfounded attacks against Sam (and other Christians) to yourself.
Romans were not mentioned in Isaiah 42 thus they cannot be relate to preaching to gentiles.
The meaning of the verse Isaiah 42:10-12 clearly say it will be the inhabitants of Arabia that will travel to far end of earth to proclaim His praise. Not Romans that spread Pauline-Christianity as can be seen today. And indeed inhabitants of Arabia have been travelling to spread New Song since 7th century till today spreading the message that is Islam. Muslims proclaim His praise everyday.
Post a Comment